D
Della
Guest
I have researched all reliable sources. Thank you for your interest in my education, but I know the truth of the matter. 
Della do you deny that there is a wax mask (made by Pierre Imans) placed over Bernadetteās face for the purpose of hiding her sunken eyes and nose and to restore her blackened face to a more natural hue?I have researched all reliable sources.![]()
What you described is what I read and IMO that isnāt incorrupt.Della do you deny that there is a wax mask (made by Pierre Imans) placed over Bernadetteās face for the purpose of hiding her sunken eyes and nose and to restore her blackened face to a more natural hue?
Due you deny the truth of the original Exhujmation Reports supplied at the time of each of her 3 exhumations (kept in the Archives of St Gildards) that state:
1909 Sept 22nd:
āThe coffin was opened⦠We noticed no smell⦠The nose was dilated and shrunken. Like the hands, the feet were wizened and the toenails were still intact⦠When the habit had been removed and the veil lifted from the head, the whole of the shriveled body could be seen, rigid and taut in every limbā¦The stomach had caved in and was taut like the rest of the body. So rigid was the body that it could be rolled over and back for washing.
ā¦In the few hours in which it had been exposed to the air the body had started turning black. The double coffin was closed, soldered, screwed down and sealed with seven seals.ā
1919 April 3rd:
āWhen the coffin was opened the body appeared to be absolutely intact and odorlessā¦the body is practically mummifiedā¦The skeleton is complete, and it was possible to carry the body to a table without any trouble. The skin has disappeared in some places, but it is still present on most parts of the body.ā
1925 April 18th:
āā¦the muscles have atrophied, but are well preserved; only the skin, which has shriveled, seems to have suffered from the effects of the damp in the coffin. ā¦but the body does not seem have putrefied, nor has any decomposition of the cadaver set in.ā
Now you may opine that the above eye witness descriptions are compatible with the phrase āperfectly incorruptā but that would not be what most readers here understand by the phrase.
Your desire to have readers believe that Bernadetteās nose is not shrunken and that she does not wear a rigid mask of wax suggests you also believe āperfectly incorruptā means she must look the same as the day she died.
Clearly this is not the case. The eye-witness facts at those exhumations seem quite at odds wrt this somewhat rosy spectacled 1960ās author (or your interpretation of her).
Her body is clearly dessicated, wizened and missing skin in places.
Medical specialists may still call this āincorruptā but she is not perfectly preserved as she was the day she died - which is what you seem to be attempting to assert here.
I do deny that a wax āmoldā was made to cover Bernadetteās face and hands because that didnāt happen and you havenāt cited anything that says otherwise. A light coating of wax was applied to her face and hands, as Iāve already stated. Itās the same thing that is done to oranges we buy in the grocery storeāwhich in no way alters the appearance of the orange. Her body had started to blacken only because the sisters washed it after it had been exhumed, otherwise this wouldnāt have happened, so it took the interference of people to make that happen, not the ordinary decay of the grave. Bernadette is incorrupt in that she is recognizable as herāfar more than any Egyptian mummy ever was. Her state is remarkable and miraculous considering no other bodies buried in the same ground were so preserved, but had decayed like bodies usually do. That is all I am saying.Della do you deny that there is a wax mask (made by Pierre Imans) placed over Bernadetteās face for the purpose of hiding her sunken eyes and nose and to restore her blackened face to a more natural hue?
Due you deny the truth of the original Exhujmation Reports supplied at the time of each of her 3 exhumations (kept in the Archives of St Gildards) that state:
1909 Sept 22nd:
āThe coffin was opened⦠We noticed no smell⦠The nose was dilated and shrunken. Like the hands, the feet were wizened and the toenails were still intact⦠When the habit had been removed and the veil lifted from the head, the whole of the shriveled body could be seen, rigid and taut in every limbā¦The stomach had caved in and was taut like the rest of the body. So rigid was the body that it could be rolled over and back for washing.
ā¦In the few hours in which it had been exposed to the air the body had started turning black. The double coffin was closed, soldered, screwed down and sealed with seven seals.ā
1919 April 3rd:
āWhen the coffin was opened the body appeared to be absolutely intact and odorlessā¦the body is practically mummifiedā¦The skeleton is complete, and it was possible to carry the body to a table without any trouble. The skin has disappeared in some places, but it is still present on most parts of the body.ā
1925 April 18th:
āā¦the muscles have atrophied, but are well preserved; only the skin, which has shriveled, seems to have suffered from the effects of the damp in the coffin. ā¦but the body does not seem have putrefied, nor has any decomposition of the cadaver set in.ā
Now you may opine that the above eye witness descriptions are compatible with the phrase āperfectly incorruptā but that would not be what most readers here understand by the phrase.
Your desire to have readers believe that Bernadetteās nose is not shrunken and that she does not wear a rigid mask of wax suggests you also believe āperfectly incorruptā means she must look the same as the day she died.
Clearly this is not the case. The eye-witness facts at those exhumations seem quite at odds wrt this somewhat rosy spectacled 1960ās author (or your interpretation of her).
Her body is clearly dessicated, wizened and missing skin in places.
Medical specialists may still call this āincorruptā but she is not perfectly preserved as she was the day she died - which is what you seem to be attempting to assert here.
Donāt know if completely, but what is exposed is certainly incorrupt.Does anyone know about St. Catherine Laboure? Is her body completely uncorrupt?
Do you know if hey were her real eyes or a ātouch upā with glass eyes?Donāt know if completely, but what is exposed is certainly incorrupt.
I saw her incorrupt body in Paris, 1998. Her eyes are open and they are blue.
Jim
Real eyes.Do you know if hey were her real eyes or a ātouch upā with glass eyes?
Neat! When I was a kid I went to a school and parish St Catherine Laboure.Real eyes.
google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.freewebs.com/luckyjane82/death%2520of%2520St.%2520Catherine.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.freewebs.com/luckyjane82/stcatherinelaboure.htm&h=487&w=976&sz=65&tbnid=FKIzVTxYHggEpM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=180&zoom=1&usg=__UX4gBSbChDMU9WAsxKuma-OGBr4=&docid=wuWH2QRrKolq3M&sa=X&ei=Wz6NUqfoLfis4APzy4DoCQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDIQ9QEwAg
In fact, the story behind her, is that a riot was breaking out in the streets outside the church where her body lay. Suddenly, her eyes opened and her hands pointed up. The event caused those who witnessed it to run into the streets announcing what they had just see. The curiosity stopped the riot as people ran to the church to see what had taken place.
Jim
This is true. When St. AndrĆ© Bessette was canonized, there was an article in the local paper about a doctor that had been retained by the Vatican to examine the miracle cures of Bl. Br. AndrĆ©. She was a very reputable physician and was moreover an atheist, and in the article she remarked how surprised she was at the Vaticanās thoroughness in examining the miracles to ensure they could not be attributed to natural phenomena.The Church tries to find any plausible natural explanation for the phenomena before considering a supernatural influence.
She excercises utmost due diligence and we cannot fault her for doing so.
ā
Indeed I did source material saying this Della - it even names the manufacturer of the mask. Please re-check below. This is of course a secondary and more recent source than the medical testimony I just provided below.I do deny that a wax āmoldā was made to cover Bernadetteās face and you havenāt cited anything that says otherwise.
This is pure unsourced speculation on your part which is not supported by any of the medical testimony I have seen. What are you basing this speculation on?Her body had started to blacken only because the sisters washed it after it had been exhumed, otherwise this wouldnāt have happened
This is more balancedā¦but it was not really what you were saying below and it is not what Faith was asking - hence my reaction. (Your belief below was originally āā¦her nose is not shrunkenā¦Bernadetteās body was perfectly preserved.ā)Bernadette is incorrupt in that she is recognizable as herāfar more than any Egyptian mummy ever was. ā¦That is all I am saying.
Of course it is, no one denies that. The question is, to what extent is it of God and to what extent is it a rare possibility of nature.Her state is remarkable⦠considering no other bodies buried in the same ground were so preservedā¦
Which hardly matters. You do know what normally happens to a dead body? I donāt ask this to be at all sarcastic, but to emphasize how truly remarkable that her body was intact after being buried without embalming. What more could we want for evidence than her obviously incorrupt face and handsāstill plainly recognizable as her and no one elseāstill intact and looking so lovely and peaceful, like sheās just sleeping? Thatās enough of a miracle for me, anyway.Actually, her feet were found to be blackened upon the first exhumation, before the nuns washed her body.
The people who exhumed St. Bernadetteās body called her incorrupt even though her feet were blackened, nose was shriveled and her body was mummified. IMO thatās not incorrupt.OK, so Iām confused.
Whatās the debate about ?
Jim
Incorrupt doesnāt mean, totally incorrupt, but the majority of the body is incorrupt.The people who exhumed St. Bernadetteās body called her incorrupt even though her feet were blackened, nose was shriveled and her body was mummified. IMO thatās not incorrupt.![]()
When the body in death is darkend in any way, or patches of skin is missing like it was in her case, IMO, thatās not incorrupt. Partially incorrupt perhaps, but not incorrupt.Incorrupt doesnāt mean, totally incorrupt, but the majority of the body is incorrupt.
Hope this helps.
Jim
Well thatās your opinion.When the body in death is darkend in any way, or patches of skin is missing like it was in her case, IMO, thatās not incorrupt. Partially incorrupt perhaps, but not incorrupt.